Leader: Details must come before a decision on independence

Published on Saturday 28 January 2012 00:00

THE Scotsman retains an open mind as to the number of options that might appear on the independence referendum ballot paper. The clarity of a single yes/no question is appealing; Mr Salmond’s manoeuvring to divide the Unionist camp with a “devo-max” option is only too transparent.

Yet there is a powerful argument for letting Scottish voters decide for themselves among competing constitutional options. Not only is that democratic, but it might also resolve the constitutional question for a generation and let the nation move on.

But whether or not there should be a second question on the ballot paper cannot be definitively answered until there is greater clarity over what devo-max actually means. The consensus is that maximal devolution implies the transfer of tax-raising powers to Holyrood, with Scotland paying into the Treasury for common UK services. Such a model is found, albeit on a small scale, in the Isle of Man. It is also used in Spain, in the Basque country.

This arrangement would force Scottish electors to link public spending gain with the with taxpayer’s pain. It would reduce friction with English voters who – rightly or wrongly – think they subsidise Scotland, and thereby strengthen the Union.

However, it is far from clear how to allocate tax-raising powers to Holyrood. In a multi-question referendum, a lack of clarity will confuse voters and unfairly profit Mr Salmond if Unionists fall out over the meaning in the midst of the campaign.

Income tax is comparatively easy to devolve, as are most taxes collected at geographical source. An obvious difficulty arises with corporation tax if it leads to competitive regional tax jurisdictions. However, many federal states live with this problem, to the benefit of business all round. VAT is more complicated because EU rules do not allow this to be set at a regional level. That can be worked around by apportioning revenues according to some agreed formula and letting Scotland (and other regions) have a voice in setting the UK VAT rate.

The really thorny question involves North Sea oil and gas. It is impossible to imagine the UK Treasury giving Holyrood control over strategic petroleum revenues. Besides, to do so would create such a political imbalance it would destabilise the UK. Equally, the SNP will not rest until Holyrood controls the oil and may denounce devo-max as a “sham” if it is not included.

Nevertheless, opinion polls do indicate majority support for some sort of devo-max option, though only by counting the second preferences of pro-independence voters. Constitutional stability would therefore depend on how willing are independence voters to settle for devo-max rather than use it as a half-way house. And that, in turn, brings us back to the practicality of the model of fiscal autonomy chosen. On that point, we need definite answers from civic Scotland and those Unionist politicians who support the idea.

Comments

There are 5 comments to this article

Order by:

• Newest first
• |
• Oldest first

Page 1 of 1

• 1
• Show all

5

Kobi

Monday, January 30, 2012 at 02:36 PM

#3 Quite. Which is why the Scotsman has been a slave to SNP ever since, as was evidenced by its support for the SNP at the 2011 elections. Never mind, come the day Scots are free, Quislings like them will get theirs.

• Report Unsuitable

4

JPJ2

Saturday, January 28, 2012 at 09:00 AM

The Scotsman Leader says: "The really thorny question involves North Sea oil and gas. It is impossible to imagine the UK Treasury giving Holyrood control over strategic petroleum revenues. Besides, to do so would create such a political imbalance it would destabilise the UK." I take it that this concedes what the Scotsman has up to now pretended it did not believe, that Scotland plus North Sea Oil (now already certainly significant until 2050 and probably for 100 years) means than an independent Scotland with oil would be wealthier than it is under the union

• Report Unsuitable

3

gus1940

Saturday, January 28, 2012 at 08:24 AM

The last time The Scotsman showed any evidence of having an open mind regarding Scottish Politics was the day before Thompson Org. sold out to the the loathesome Barclay Bros who then installed Brillo Pad who set it on course to journalistic oblivion which subsequently accelerated when The Barclays sold out to JP.

• Report Unsuitable

2

weegy

Saturday, January 28, 2012 at 03:47 AM

salmond "dividing the unionist camp" ?? can it get much more divided?

• Report Unsuitable

1

christelijk_recht

Saturday, January 28, 2012 at 12:59 AM

"In a multi-question referendum, a lack of clarity will confuse voters and unfairly profit Mr Salmond . . " ...................................................................................................................... Dripping condescension and utter hypocrisy from this Unionist rag. ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, "The really thorny question involves North Sea oil and gas. It is impossible to imagine the UK Treasury giving Holyrood control over strategic petroleum revenues." ..................................................................................................................... I think this remark just about kills any remaining credibility you had, stone dead. Unbelievable. .....................................................................................................................

• Report Unsuitable

Order by:

• Newest first
• |
• Oldest first

Page 1 of 1

• 1
• Show all

Logged in as:

Comment here. Start typing your comment here:

Post comment

Please adhere to our Community guidelines

Your view

Please sign in to be able to comment on this story.